Brady is better than Manning. He has more rings and now with statistics he's proving he's the better QB by being more efficient, putting up crazy numbers and making no mistakes. He does just as much as Peyton with calling and controlling the offense but people don't notice that the way they do with Peyton because such a big deal was made earlier in Peyton's career about the audibles and hand signs he does presnap but Brady does all of that as well. Not to mention he won with mediocre WRs, put up ridiculous numbers with good WRs and is still doing it with young WRs.
Manning has won almost as many games as Brady with far below average defenses. It balances out the 'mediocre WR' argument. Brady usually has a far stronger running game. I don't use rings as a measure of individual greatness, otherwise someone could make the argument that Terry Bradshaw was as good a QB as Joe Montana because they both have 4 rings. Or someone could say the Rothelisberger is better than Marino was. C'mon now.
Also, without Brady, Bill Belichik can get 11-5 out of whats his name with his coaching and team he has built. Also, if Vinateri has a couple of bad kicks, Brady is a "choke artist". (Not to mention he needed a kicker to win his Superbowls) Oh and the Tuck Rule in 2001.
The Colts can't even win 2 games without Manning. (Dungy and Irsay are forever douchebags in my book for that boneheaded move.)
And honestly, even Brady has said Manning is the better QB. And before you say "oh he is just being gracious", he could have said nothing on the issue or just said thank you to the people that said he was the best and no one would have said anything bad about him.
I will give that Brady has been really efficient, but he has had better overall teams and far better coaching than Manning has. Really, the only place Brady hasn't consistently had an advantage over Manning is the receiver position, except the year Moss decided to actually play.
All that said, it's like comparing a 10.1k diamond to a 10.2k diamond. The argument for Brady being the best is certainly there and I only dispute it as far as I would personally choose Manning as my QB over Brady.
As I originally said, they both deserve the 99 (it doesn't mean they have the exact same strengths and weaknesses by the way) for the game as they are both absolutely the best at their positions as or right now and are head and shoulders above any other QB playing.
Amused at the fact that Witten's 44 more catches again aren't mentioned. ALSO Jon Kitna was QBing this Cowboys team a majority of the year and threw Witten 8 of his 9 touchdowns!
So by your 6 less games argument. . . Miles Austin was deserving of being higher than Larry Fitz and Calvin because he put up more yards (than Fitz and Calvin) and 6 more td's than Calvin in 5 less games. Sooo Miles should have been a 96-98 OVR?
I love irrational arguments and illogical conclusions from fan boys.
any injured player should not be a 99 sorry revis but the raiders had a better cb last yr. witten has better numbers than gates i dont see a te being 99 anyway. troy was hurt last yr too. i hate brady but offensive mvp gets you a 99 and defensive mvp should get you a 99 so where is matthews.
any injured player should not be a 99 sorry revis but the raiders had a better cb last yr. witten has better numbers than gates i dont see a te being 99 anyway. troy was hurt last yr too. i hate brady but offensive mvp gets you a 99 and defensive mvp should get you a 99 so where is matthews.
Yep cause it was nmandi out there holding guys like Wayne to 1 yard last year in the playoffs. O Wait.
Dude was injured the 1st qt of the season and dominated the other 3/4ths of the season and the playoffs.
I certainly disagree with these ratings. I still think Manning is the best QB in the NFL. If any QB deserves a 99 rating it should be Peyton. Gates at a 99 overall is too high. I might be a little biased but Witten has shown he's the best TE in the NFL over the past few seasons.
I don't think Witten deserves a 99 rating but he should be rated somewhat higher than all TE's. I think he's been a 94 default rating the past 2-3 Madden games. He probably should be a 95-96 overall. His catch rating at 90 is way low for him.
He rarely drops a ball or fumbles either. His catch rating should definitely be higher than any TE in the NFL. Brady at QB should be right up there for sure. You can't say Rodgers should be higher than him just because he won the Super Bowl last season. It's what you've done over time that gets you these high ratings.
Having said that, Rodgers will probably be the top rated QB within the next couple years. Donnie Moore needs to study these ratings a bit more. I think he's gotten them wrong but hey we can adjust to our liking so no bigggy!
Some are missing the point of Witten/Gates debate.
Witten is the best TE in the league, Gates is not. He is just the best receiving tight end, he is practically a wide receiver playing tight end. Witten does everything a tight end should do better then anyone it the game.
Gates shouldn't be 99 hes always hurt and he lacks skills as an elite blocker at the tight end position.
Troy should not be a 99 either he can not man cover anyone at all. He was no where to be found during the Super Bowl. He makes a lot of plays but, he also costs the Steelers a lot of plays when he guesses wrong the elite QBs are able to manipulate Troys lack of coverage skills.
Brady? Who won the Superbowl? Rodgers should be a 99.
So then every player on the Packers should be a 99? No, winning a super bowl should not affect your rating. You're the same player regardless. Maybe his clutch rating should increase, but nothing else.
How is Tom Brady over rated? He has done more with less his whole career, with the exception of the 07 season when he finally got a REAL #1 WR and all he did was throw 50 TDs.